1986 Pontiac 1000 vs. 2010 Smart ForTwo
To start off, 2010 Smart ForTwo is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Pontiac 1000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Pontiac 1000 would be higher. At 1,599 cc (4 cylinders), 1986 Pontiac 1000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Smart ForTwo (70 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 6 more horse power than 1986 Pontiac 1000. (64 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Smart ForTwo should accelerate faster than 1986 Pontiac 1000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1986 Pontiac 1000 weights approximately 140 kg more than 2010 Smart ForTwo.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 1986 Pontiac 1000 (109 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 17 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Smart ForTwo. (92 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1986 Pontiac 1000 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Smart ForTwo.
Compare all specifications:
1986 Pontiac 1000 | 2010 Smart ForTwo | |
Make | Pontiac | Smart |
Model | 1000 | ForTwo |
Year Released | 1986 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 1599 cc | 1000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 64 HP | 70 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5800 RPM |
Torque | 109 Nm | 92 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 960 kg | 820 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4120 mm | 2695 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1580 mm | 1560 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1542 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2400 mm | 1867 mm |